Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 8833417)

What? His hands are very questionable. There's no way right now he's a #1 WR.

Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 8833354)

I just don't understand how the hell people (aka Clayton) keep bashing Cassel for this performance?

13/18, 142 yards, 8 yard average per completion, 4/6 on 3rd down all with his WR fumbling and his OT ruining a drive with 2 straight penalties.

Yes Cassel has been bad the past 3 years, but the way he's playing right now is encouraging.

He plays like he did in 2010 and we win the division.

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 8833715)

2010...

When we ran more than we passed we won 10 times. We also lost a game (Houston) where we ran more. (There may be more than this one, but I don't care to go back and look right now)

When we passed more than we ran, we lost.

2012...

First half under Cassel...

Game 1. Ran more times. Up at half... Won

Game 2. Passed more times. Down at half... Lost

If we run more times than we pass in 2012 then you may be correct. We just may win the division. Just like we did in 2010.

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 8832816)

Fitzgerald had already been in the league for 4 years when Warner played his first full season as the starter in Arizona.

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 8833727)

We didn't lose last night because of Matt Cassel.

Originally Posted by Chiefshrink (Post 8833825)

Wrong. Fitz drafted in 04. Warner signed in 05. Again, Fitz proved his rookie yr he was special and Warner was able to accelerate and expose his greatness from there on out with a little Leinert hiccup along the way. Baldwin does not have that luxury in a QB situation here but I believe he will have his great moments but they just won't be as often as we would like with Cassel at the helm.

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 8833728)

We weren't losing against the Rams because we passed more than we ran. Our D was shit and we turned the ball over.

Originally Posted by Chiefshrink (Post 8832787)

He did ?? Warner ? Don't get me wrong I believe Fitz would have gotten to that elite level eventually but my whole point is when you have HOF QB's to get your career off to a great start( a la Rice and Fitz) it makes it much easier to get to that Rice/Fitz level of play of which Baldwin DOES NOT have that luxury in Cassel and WHY it will take Baldwin longer IMHO. I along with many others here I believe he has the physical tools to get to that level but he also needs a top tier QB to utilize ALL of his abilities. And top tier QB is not defined as HOF caliber either. But Cassel is not even in the top 20 of this league at this point IMO.

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 8833867)

I didn't say we did.

I'm just stating the facts, and I will sit back and wait for you to disprove this...

Not always... in either case... but more likely than not... when we throw more than we run with Matt Cassel, we lose. When we run the ball more, we win.

Facts are facts.

I will wait for your rebuttal to disprove this.

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 8833867)

when we throw more than we run with Matt Cassel, we lose. When we run the ball more, we win.

Facts are facts.

I will wait for your rebuttal to disprove this.

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 8833872)

God you are dumb as hell. Warner wasn't the full time starter in Arizona until 08. STFU already.

Originally Posted by Messier (Post 8833940)

I too have facts. Throw to Jon Baldwin but incomplete = win

Throw to Jon Baldwin complete but fumbles = lose.


Therefore, we must not complete passes to Jon Baldwin.

Disprove that.

Originally Posted by dj56dt58 (Post 8833910)

According to the thing they did on Kurt Warner on NFL Network, Fitz was fine with being good and had no desire to be the best..Kurt pushed him to become the best